Search form

Labor Dispute Divides Agency

Staff and Administration AdoptStrongly Adversarial Positions As
Decision on Union Nears At Community Services

By MANDY LOCKE

The Martha's Vineyard Community Services labor dispute took a
step closer to resolution during National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
hearings in Boston this week as Community Services management and the
Hospital Workers Union, on behalf of 19 employees from Island Counseling
Center, agreed to extend voting privileges to all professional employees
of Community Services.

"From the very beginning of the National Labor Relations Board
proceedings with the Hospital Workers Union, the board and
administration of Martha's Vineyard Community Services have taken
the position that it was wrong for the union to attempt to separate one
of our programs, Island Counseling Center, from the other four programs
that provide care to residents of this community," Community
Services executive director Ned Robinson-Lynch said in a press release
this week.

"Finally, after more than two days of hearings, on April 15,
2002, the union agreed to abandon this tactic. The union agreed to
change its petition for all professional employees of the agency's
program," he wrote.

Under the National Labor Relations Law, professional status extends
to counselors, therapists and registered nurses of Island Counseling
Center (ICC) as well as to registered nurses, physical therapists,
speech pathologists and occupational therapists of the Visiting Nurse
Service (VNS). Between 25 and 35 of the agency's total staff of
130 workers fall under the new classifications.

"The workers are relieved the hearings are over. It's
inevitably up to the people of ICC and VNS. As the dust settles from the
legal proceedings, they're excited to have the chance to finally
vote," said Rob Witherell, organizing director of the Hospital
Workers Union, local 767.

While Community Services management and the union reached the
"professional employee" eligibility agreement early in
Monday's hearing, the parties continued to debate through Monday
and Tuesday whether Island Counseling Center clinical supervisors and
graduate interns would be allowed to vote on forming the bargaining
unit.

Under the federal labor law, management must be excluded from the
union. Community Services administration argues that clinical
supervisors are considered management. The union counters that because
clinical supervisors have no hiring, firing, promotion or reprimanding
powers, they are not technically considered management.

"I have no real authority as defined by the labor law. I
provide supervision that focuses on the provision of clinical
care," said Jane Dreeben, ICC director of substance abuse services
and one of four ICC employees in question because of her status as a
clinical supervisor.

The NLRB is expected to rule in the next few weeks on which
employees have voting rights. Eligible employees could vote whether to
join a union as soon as the end of May.

The NLRB hearings followed the March 15 filing of a petition by 19
employees of Island Counseling Center to the NLRB to form a bargaining
unit. The petitioners cite a concern for consistent client care, wage
grievances and need for an articulated pay scale as the impetus for
joining a union. At hearings held March 27 and 28, Community Services
administration argued that all agency employees - excluding
management, clerical staff and Thrift Shop employees - should be
allowed to vote whether to join a union. Hearings continued Monday and
Tuesday because the management and the union reached no agreement on
voting eligibility in March.

The union admonished Mr. Robinson-Lynch for wasting money on legal
fees and for stalling hearings in front of the NLRB.

"Shame on Ned Robinson-Lynch, the MVCS executive director, for
not respecting the decision made by a majority of his employees in the
Island Counseling Center. For months and months, they have tried to work
with management to improve their work environment. Frustrated with an
unresponsive management, these petitioners made the decision to form a
union for the purposes of collective bargaining," the letter from
union officials states.

The letter prompted a response from Community Services
administration's attorney Richard Perras of Edwards and Angell.

"The Hospital Workers Union is apparently claiming that
Martha's Vineyard Community Services is spending legal fees to
delay proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board. The union
is wrong. I represent MVCS before the NLRB and am doing so on a pro bono
basis," Mr. Perras said.

"The union has grossly maligned Ned Robinson-Lynch. The union
has made accusations that are completely untrue and unsupported by the
facts," Mr. Perras continued, saying that the union had, in fact,
been stalling the hearings.

Letters continued to trickle into the newspaper this week, mostly
from ICC employees sharing their grievances and articulating the urgency
of unionizing.

"It is about being patronized by an administration that does
not appear to value the quality, or the quantity, of the work that we
do; to value the dedication and the years of training and experience
that we bring to this profession," said Dr. Jane Cleare, an ICC
petitioner, in a letter to the editors this week.

"The National Association of Social Workers code of ethics
states, ‘The social worker should work to improve the employing
agency's policies and procedures, and the effectiveness of its
services.' In addition, ‘The social worker should advocate
changes in policy and legislation to improve social conditions and to
promote social justice.' In essence, this is what we, as employees
of ICC, are attempting to do. I would encourage any client in a similar
financially oppressive work environment to do the same. It is
unfortunate that the administration at MVCS refuses to back down as the
perpetrator of such social injustice," wote Heidi Spruce, an ICC
petitioner, in a letter to the editor this week.

After the agreement reached by management and the union during this
week's hearings, the fate of a union vote may hinge on employees
of the Visiting Nurse Service.

"I'm very sure of how ICC would vote, but I don't
know about VNS. We'll just have to see how it goes," said
ICC petitioner Amy Lilavois.

"They can decide for themselves what is right for them and
their program. I just want it to be an honest process," Ms.
Dreeben said.

In the meantime, both Community Services administrators and union
representatives vow to inform employees how union status would affect
them.

"Between now and the election, the agency intends to present
all the facts to our staff. Once our employees have reviewed and
considered all the facts, we are confident that they will determine that
this union is not best for them or the community we serve," Mr.
Robinson-Lynch concluded in the press release.

The ICC petitioners and union representatives will host a public
forum April 29 at 5:30 p.m. in the Oak Bluffs School library.

"Public input is very important as to how a community agency
works," Mr. Witherell said.